News What will happen in the 2006 mid-term elections?

[Astronuc]

Election 2006
Midterm Congressional Races? Pick 'Em
by Andrea Seabrook and Linda Wertheimer
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6358676

Weekend Edition Saturday, October 21, 2006 · As the midterm elections approach, voters are trying to sort out politics, personality and policy issues. It's not always easy and this could be the most volatile election since the GOP groundswell of 1994 -- or even the post-Watergate vote in 1974.

Reid Pressed to Explain Land-Deal Profits
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6355043

All Things Considered, October 20, 2006 · Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV) has promised to amend his financial reports to more fully explain a profitable land deal he made with a partner in Las Vegas. The Associated Press reported that Reid's original disclosure was incomplete, in possible violation of Senate ethics rules.

Since then, Republicans have been lambasting the Democratic leader. Reid would likely become majority leader if the Democrats retake the Senate in November. But questions surround the deal that earned Reid $700,000 in profits.

Reid's partner in the deal is a friend and lawyer whose name has surfaced in organized-crime investigations.

Analysis
GOP Scrambles to Save Congressional Majority
by Steve Inskeep, Mara Liasson and Ken Rudin
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6352046

Morning Edition, October 20, 2006 · With record-low approval ratings, Republican congressional representatives are scrambling to get ahead in the polls. With only three weeks to go before midterm elections, everyone is asking whether the GOP can hold on to either house of Congress.

Election 2006
Polls Show Democrats' Advantage in House Races
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6355019
by Mara Liasson

All Things Considered, October 20, 2006 · It has been a month of dramatic developments in the midterm congressional campaigns. Every day seems to bring fresh bad news for Republicans. Although the economy remains strong, the situation in Iraq has deteriorated. And the scandal around resigned Rep. Mark Foley continues to be unresolved.

Polls now show Democratic candidates have leads in about 40 House districts that are currently held by Republicans -- and in 4 races where Republican senators are running for re-election.

The Republicans' troubles have sparked a round of second-guessing about the strategy designed by Karl Rove, President Bush's political mastermind. Rove stresses getting the party's voting base to the polls, using conservative values appeals to pump up the numbers of GOP votes.

One should vote with one's convictions and not based on polls.

 

[Astronuc]

“Hastert has made it clear that he won't resign, and that makes sense. But if current trends continue, he won't be the speaker of the House after this year. And I suspect he won't become the minority leader in the 110th Congress, either.” Ken Rudin's column on NPR.org

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6352046

The US really needs a third and viable alternative to Democrats and Republicans.

We need a Physics Party.

or how about a Hardy Party or Hearty Party?

 

[Astronuc]

Election 2006
Republicans Zig; Will Christian Conservatives Zag?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6298604
by Rachel Martin

All Things Considered, October 18, 2006 · Two years ago, Evangelical Christians went to the polls in huge numbers and provided a big boost for George Bush and the Republican Party.

Since then, shifts within the Evangelical movement have broadened its focus beyond the signature issues of same-sex marriage and abortion, and lobbying and sex scandals in Washington have raised concerns that the GOP may not be able to count on such a strong evangelical turnout.

You can see that evolving relationship in churches like Potter's House Church of God outside Columbus, in the battleground state of Ohio.

On a recent Wednesday, the gymnasium-like sanctuary is filled with a couple hundred worshippers. With a microphone in one hand and a Bible in the other, guest pastor Steve Lorentz drives home a cornerstone message.

"In the Kings and the Chronicles you read about the men and it says he did that which was right or he did that which is evil," Lorentz tells the crowd. "You know there's only two ways to do it folks. It's either good or bad -- right or wrong."

Meanwhile, on the issue of Iraq,

Democrats Urge Bush to Change Course in Iraq
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6360410

All Things Considered, October 21, 2006 · Amid growing political pressure over the worsening situation in Iraq, President Bush consults with his top military and civilian advisers on war strategy. On Friday, 12 Democratic leaders in Congress sent the president a letter, urging a change in course. Jacki Lyden interviews one of the signatories -- Rep. Ike Skelton of Missouri, the ranking Democrat on the House Armed Services Committee.

 

[Astronuc]

The rumors of Rumsfeld stepping down before the election are getting louder. Cheney should also. Well - so should Bush.


In 2008, I would like to see Colin Powell run for President. I think he has the vision and integrity that seems to be lacking in Washington.

 

[turbo]

In 2008, I would like to see Colin Powell run for President. I think he has the vision and integrity that seems to be lacking in Washington.

I used to respect Colin Powell, but after his shameful shilling for the administration on WMDs, etc I'd have to hold my nose to vote for him. He is a military man, and he KNOWS what war does, yet he helped Shooter, Rummy, and the Idiot-in-Chief sell this one. We need candidates with more integrity than he has demonstrated. If he had told the truth and gotten fired for his honesty, he'd have my vote. He lied for the chickenhawks knowing full well that the war would cost us dearly. I can't forgive that.

 

[Astronuc]

We certainly don't know all the details of private conversations between Powell and the President. I think Powell was trying to work within the system, which in the case of the Bush admin, is like banging one's head agains a granite wall.

I think Powell did believe that Saddam Hussein had WMD, or was close to re-establishing the capability. Gen. Marks and others assumed that. David Kay went to Iraq assuming there was something to find. Kay later testified that although that had not found WMD, it didn't mean that they (or precursors) weren't there somewhere.

However, it looks like Kay found that most of the pre-war intelligence was based on 1998 and earlier. Intelligence after 1998 was poor and largely guesses or worse, fantasy. All of that was insufficient to go to war. Bush went to war because he wanted to go to war, and so did Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz (now head of the World Bank), and a host of neo-conservative Bush supporters.

 

[McGyver]

It is Monday, Oct. 23, and I believe I can say with reasonable certainty that the Bush White House is going to stay the course on their foreign policy matters. This means Rumsfeld stays, no one talks to the press w/o top White House approval, and the White House is going into the Congressional term elections "as is." Republicans up for Congress will sink or swim with the White House's position. If Republicans loose one house of Congress, there will likely be a meltdown of the Republican party as we know it today, setting the stage for 2008 Presidential race.

Yes - it is tragic for America and for Colin Powell's legacy - that he has chosen to remain silent on his insights with the Iraq conflict. He seved his boss well, but failed his duty to America.

 

[turbo]

Yes - it is tragic for America and for Colin Powell's legacy - that he has chosen to remain silent on his insights with the Iraq conflict. He seved his boss well, but failed his duty to America.

That's my take on Powell, too, and I am saddened by it, though I cannot let it go. Powell is not just an intelligent, competent military officer, he is (or was) a powerful political force. He squandered his political influence selling a war that was entirely unjustified and unwinnable (given the absence of any actual goals).

 

[Astronuc]

That's my take on Powell, too, and I am saddened by it, though I cannot let it go. Powell is not just an intelligent, competent military officer, he is (or was) a powerful political force. He squandered his political influence selling a war that was entirely unjustified and unwinnable (given the absence of any actual goals).

I more or less agree with these assessments. I have to wonder if people are loyal to a party or president, rather than to the country and Constitution.

Garner didn't tell the president when he had an opportunity to tell him that the US had already made 3 great mistakes. By the time Powell began speaking out, he was asked to leave.

Rice and Powell should have had it out with Bush over Rumsfeld. Probably wouldn't have done any good. The current GOP (or maybe it's just politics, although I have noticed that Democrats are more receptive to dissention and disagreement) seems to be all about top-down team playing - kind of like the Chinese communist party. Oh, you get choices - it's whatever choices are given to you.

 

[McGyver]

Vote with your best conscience. But also be practical. Cast your vote where it will count the most. Cast your vote to assure a responsible government. America can never again allow "one political party" to control its White House and both Houses of Congress.

As we have seen for several years, you have no oversight. And without oversight, you have corruption, abuse, failed laws, absense of truth, and a future very much in question! Vote for accountability in government! Vote out those in Congress who would give a free pass to anyone in the White House!

 

[Astronuc]

http://www.dontvote.com/map.html

Learn about where the candidates stand on issues - according to the AARP.

 

[BobG]

Forget how many seats the Republicans gain or lose, it just doesn't matter any more...

... because this election will end in apocaplypse for sure. The entire fabric of the universe has been irreparably ripped by this election season.

Rick Santorum boasting of how closely he has worked and cooperated with Hillary Clinton, Joe Leiberman, and Barbara Boxer? And doing it in a wrestling ring?

And Clay Shaw boasting how closely he worked with Bill Clinton during Clinton's Presidency and how Clay Shaw wrote the bills that Bill turned into law? Well, at least he worked closely with Bill Clinton when he wasn't busy impeaching him.

And come to think of it, Newt Gingrich has become pretty tight with Hillary and George 41 sure spends a lot of time with Bill. Has six years of Republican Clinton bashing come down to this??!

Like I said, it can only mean that we've truly reached the end.

 

[Astronuc]

And come to think of it, Newt Gingrich has become pretty tight with Hillary and George 41 sure spends a lot of time with Bill. Has six years of Republican Clinton bashing come down to this??!

Politics makes for stranger bed-fellows. Eeeewwww!

Acutally I have heard some conservatives say that Clinton was more Republican than some Republicans.

And some local political commentator mentioned months ago that Rupert Murdoch (FOX News) was one of Hillary Clinton's new best friend. I wonder what each gets out of that?


Battle for House Looks Tight as Vote Nears
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6397232
by Scott Simon and Mara Liasson

Weekend Edition Saturday, October 28, 2006 · With just 10 days left before the midterm elections, Republicans are prepared to lose House seats and Democrats expect gains. But will Republicans lose control of the House? That's up in the air.

 

[Astronuc]

A Senate Race Riding on Cash Flow
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/29/nyregion/29conn.html?ref=washington

HARTFORD, Oct. 27 — While Senator Joseph I. Lieberman may have lost the Democratic primary to a novice politician, his bid in the general election has come with all the financial advantages of a major party candidate and an 18-year incumbent.

Meanwhile, his financial prowess has prompted his opponent, Ned Lamont, to dig deeper into his pockets, putting $12.7 million into the campaign so far.

Mr. Lieberman, who has run for national office twice, has tapped into millions of dollars from the networks of major Republican and Democratic donors, as well as from business groups and lobbyists who have rallied around him, and several out-of-state independent groups who do not coordinate directly with the campaign.

The hotly contested Senate race has quickly become the most expensive in the state’s history, with Mr. Lieberman spending $11.5 million and Mr. Lamont spending $8.6 million through the end of September.

And there is no sign of slowing down. There have been fund-raising meals for Mr. Lieberman several times a week. . . . .

Last week, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton played host to a fund-raiser for Mr. Lamont at a home on the Upper East Side. Earlier this year, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV played host to an event on Mr. Lamont’s behalf.

The campaign has also worked with Mr. Lamont’s longtime friends in Greenwich to organize a “Republicans for Lamont” fund-raiser.

. . . .

This is representative democracy? It seems more like "Pay to Play". How is the average person supposed to get a voice?

Meanwhile - US Democrats with Big Edge in Campaign's Last Week
http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/washington/politics-usa-politics-election.html

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats enter the final week of the fight for Congress with a commanding edge over Republicans, who hope a strong voter turnout effort and shift in focus away from Iraq can limit their losses.

Recent polls show that growing Democratic momentum, fed by strong dissatisfaction with President George W. Bush's leadership and the war in Iraq, threatens Republican power in the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate.

The public's thirst for change in Washington has Republicans pondering how bad things will be in the November 7 election and calculating whether they can stop Democrats from picking up the 15 House and six Senate seats needed to claim majorities. . . . .

Moderate Republicans Feeling Like Endangered Species
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/28/us/politics/28moderates.html

. . . “There wasn’t an impetus to help develop a political and legislative plan that incorporated the broad umbrella of philosophy in our party,” said Senator Olympia J. Snowe, Republican of Maine, whom experts expect to be easily re-elected. “I think they always operated under the wrong assumption that you just appeal to the base and no more than that.”

Ms. Snowe and other moderates, while holding out hope that most of their counterparts would hang on, were dismayed by the prospect of depleted ranks, saying it could lead to a more polarized Congress.
. . . .

A polarized Congress may exacerbate the do-nothing trend.

Democrats Get Late Donations From Business
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/28/us/politics/28hedge.html

WASHINGTON, Oct. 27 — Corporate America is already thinking beyond Election Day, increasing its share of last-minute donations to Democratic candidates and quietly devising strategies for how to work with Democrats if they win control of Congress.

The shift in political giving, for the first 18 days of October, has not been this pronounced in the final stages of a campaign since 1994, when Republicans swept control of the House for the first time in four decades.

Though Democratic control of either chamber of Congress is far from certain, the prospect of a power shift is leading interest groups to begin rethinking well-established relationships, with business lobbyists going as far as finding potential Democratic allies in the freshman class — even if they are still trying to defeat them on the campaign trail — and preparing to extend an olive branch the morning after the election.

Lobbyists, some of whom had fallen out of the habit of attending Democratic events, are even talking about making their way to the Sonnenalp Resort in Vail, Colo., where Representative Nancy Pelosi of California is holding a Speaker’s Club ski getaway on Jan. 3. It is an annual affair, but the gathering’s title could be especially apt for Ms. Pelosi, the House minority leader, who will be on hand to accept $15,000 checks, and could, if everything breaks her way, become the first woman to be House speaker.

I wonder if a common phrase in Washington is still "Show me the money."

 

[McGyver]

2006 Election Season Mirroring 1976 Post Watergate Election

If you hadn't sensed it, or if you're too young to remember, this election season has a very similar feel to the 1976 election - only 18 months post Watergate. In that election, Democrats did very well as many Americans felt let down by the Republican Nixon Administration, and expressed that discontent at the polls. Though Jimmy Carter's presidency did not go well with double-digit inflation and the Iran hostage crisis, the election still was a referendum on the limits of corruption that America will tolerate.

Yes - this 2006 may not be a presidential election, but it appears (based on every poll) voters are preparing to paint a NO MORE CORRUPTION referendum on Republican Congress and (especially) White House failures -to races at all levels of government. In essense, voters may hold all Republicans accountable for the Bush White House failures in Iraq, New Orleans, the ban on federal stem cell funding, high oil costs, etc. It is as though many Republicans could be voted out of office as a form of "public impeachment" of President Bush - of note in election history.

 

[turbo]

I fear that the "no more corruption" trend (as expressed in polls) is not going to give the Dems enough new seats to take control of the House or Senate. The reasons: 1) many House districts have been gerrymandered to make them safe for the incumbents
2) People who express general dissatisfaction with the party in power do not always take it out on their own congressman or senator.

I hope I am wrong.

 

[Astronuc]

If you hadn't sensed it, or if you're too young to remember, this election season has a very similar feel to the 1976 election - only 18 months post Watergate. In that election, Democrats did very well as many Americans felt let down by the Republican Nixon Administration, and expressed that discontent at the polls. Though Jimmy Carter's presidency did not go well with double-digit inflation and the Iran hostage crisis, the election still was a referendum on the limits of corruption that America will tolerate.

Yes - this 2006 may not be a presidential election, but it appears (based on every poll) voters are preparing to paint a NO MORE CORRUPTION referendum on Republican Congress and (especially) White House failures -to races at all levels of government. In essense, voters may hold all Republicans accountable for the Bush White House failures in Iraq, New Orleans, the ban on federal stem cell funding, high oil costs, etc. It is as though many Republicans could be voted out of office as a form of "public impeachment" of President Bush - of note in election history.

True, that there are parallels with the 1976 election, but there are significant differences. The country seems more politically polarized now (i.e. inclined to vote one party or the other), but there may be enough people in the middle who could either way.

I've heard for many the issue is Iraq, and more recently the Foley scandal and moral issues, and for some it's still the economy, which by some measures is doing quite well, while by other measures is somewhat tenuous.

It will be interesting to see what happens next week.

 

[edward]

The republicans are constantly saying that the democrats have no agenda. If the Gay marriage issue is all that the republicans can come up with at this point , shame on them.

WASHINGTON, Oct. 26 — The divisive debate over gay marriage, which played a prominent role in 2004 campaigns but this year largely faded from view, erupted anew on Thursday as President Bush and Republicans across the country tried to use a court ruling in New Jersey to rally dispirited conservatives to the polls.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/27/u...7200&en=f1900d2a62e2f2aa&ei=5087 &oref=slogin

 

[BobG]

I fear that the "no more corruption" trend (as expressed in polls) is not going to give the Dems enough new seats to take control of the House or Senate. The reasons: 1) many House districts have been gerrymandered to make them safe for the incumbents
2) People who express general dissatisfaction with the party in power do not always take it out on their own congressman or senator.

I hope I am wrong.

Not enough to take the House? At this point, I figure Dems pick up 19 seats plus 10 races that are too close to call. And that ignores "hot" races with no polls, or only one less reliable poll. When Dems say 20-30 seats, I think the 20 is being very conservative to avoid making an election triumph look like Dems failing to meet expectations.

Unless Bush attacking Kerry can stir up some kind of miracle, the House is shaping up to be a slaughter. At this point, the race is to hold onto the Senate.

 

[Astronuc]

As Vote Nears, Stances on War Set Off Sparks
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/us/politics/01elect.html

WASHINGTON, Oct. 31 — For at least a few hours on Tuesday, President Bush had a chance to relive his victorious campaign of 2004, taking a break from a bleak Republican campaign season as he attacked Senator John Kerry of Massachusetts over the war in Iraq.

Mr. Kerry, the Massachusetts Democrat who was Mr. Bush’s opponent in 2004, is not running for office this year. But the president seized on what he said were Mr. Kerry’s disparaging remarks about the troops — and what Mr. Kerry insisted was a botched joke aimed at Mr. Bush — as he sought to make Mr. Kerry the face of the Democratic Party this fall.

In the process, Mr. Bush brought renewed attention to the war in Iraq, which he defended with vigor while campaigning in Georgia, at the very moment that a number of Republican Congressional candidates, following the advice of party strategists, were stepping up their efforts to distance themselves from the White House on the war as the campaign enters its final days.

“President Bush isn’t getting our frustrations — it’s time to be decisive, beat the terrorists,” Mike McGavick, the Republican candidate for Senate in Washington, said in an advertisement that began running this week. “Partition the country if we have to and get our troops home in victory.”
. . .
In a debate a day earlier, Mr. Chafee indicated he would be willing to call on Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld to step down; Mr. Whitehouse has been pressing Mr. Chafee to do just that in his television advertisements. In Tennessee, Bob Corker, a Republican candidate for Senate, said it was time for a new plan and a change in leadership at the Pentagon.

Kerry's comment was supposed to be ""Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush." But apparently he botched it. It seems he was disparaging Bush as intellectually lazy not the troops. But apparently the remark came across "that people unable to succeed in the U.S. educational system would likely 'get stuck in Iraq.'" If Kerry mispoke and his comment was miscontrued then he should apologize and clarify. I don't understand the reluctance for someone to apologize if one's remarks have hurt or offended another.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061101/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_kerry

Bush has yet to apologize (sincerely) about misleading the nation into the war in Iraq and lying about it.

 

[BobG]

As Vote Nears, Stances on War Set Off Sparks
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/01/us/politics/01elect.html

Kerry's comment was supposed to be ""Do you know where you end up if you don't study, if you aren't smart, if you're intellectually lazy? You end up getting us stuck in a war in Iraq. Just ask President Bush." But apparently he botched it. It seems he was disparaging Bush as intellectually lazy not the troops. But apparently the remark came across "that people unable to succeed in the U.S. educational system would likely 'get stuck in Iraq.'" If Kerry mispoke and his comment was miscontrued then he should apologize and clarify. I don't understand the reluctance for someone to apologize if one's remarks have hurt or offended another.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061101/ap_on_go_pr_wh/white_house_kerry

Bush has yet to apologize (sincerely) about misleading the nation into the war in Iraq and lying about it.

Kerry's comments have made him a lot less attractive on the campaign trail. http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/11/01/kerry.remarks/index.html

I guess now both Bush and Kerry have enough free time on their hands for another Presidential debate. Maybe they can televise it, preferably somewhere around Channel 367.

 

[matthew baird]

WASHINGTON (AP) — So far this campaign, the political parties have exposed voters to nearly $160 million in ads attacking congressional candidates. How much spent painting a positive image? About $17 million.
That's nearly $1 of nice for every $10 of nasty.

Crap like this just pisses me off! Really, if it was my decision I would dissolve all political parties and have independents run the country. The current situation with political party bickering is out of hand. George Washington himself warned that the political parties would cause problems in the future in his exit speech. If only we would have listened to him.

 

[Astronuc]

Crap like this just pisses me off! Really, if it was my decision I would dissolve all political parties and have independents run the country. The current situation with political party bickering is out of hand. George Washington himself warned that the political parties would cause problems in the future in his exit speech. If only we would have listened to him.

Write in "Matthew Baird".

So Matt, what are you plans for 2008?

Also, write in Russ Watters - another very viable candidate.

In fact, write in your favorite PF personality.

 

[matthew baird]

Write in "Matthew Baird".

So Matt, what are you plans for 2008?

Also, write in Russ Watters - another very viable candidate.

In fact, write in your favorite PF personality.

HAHAHA Okay, I'll write in "Astronuc" lol!
Funny thing is, I live in Utah! So my vote counts less than it already did
I'll have to read up more on Russ Watters...(edit) oh wait hahah just realized who he is LOL. As for 08', we will see what happens between now and then.

 

[Skyhunter]

Not enough to take the House? At this point, I figure Dems pick up 19 seats plus 10 races that are too close to call. And that ignores "hot" races with no polls, or only one less reliable poll. When Dems say 20-30 seats, I think the 20 is being very conservative to avoid making an election triumph look like Dems failing to meet expectations.

Unless Bush attacking Kerry can stir up some kind of miracle, the House is shaping up to be a slaughter. At this point, the race is to hold onto the Senate.

So far no miracle.

CQPolitics has it

House

Democrats=211
Republicans=207
No clear favorite =17

Senate
Democrats=48
Republicans=48
No clear favorite=4

The trend has been steadily against the Republicans.

 

[Astronuc]

Well, Kerry apologized, and some Republicans are satsified.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061102/ap_on_el_ge/election_rdp_33

WASHINGTON - Fearful of damaging his own party in next week's elections, Sen. John Kerry apologized Wednesday to "any service member, family member or American" offended by remarks deemed by Republicans and Democrats to be insulting to U.S. forces in Iraq.

Six days before the election, the Democrats' 2004 presidential nominee said he wanted to avoid becoming a distraction in the final days of the battle for control of Congress. He added he sincerely regretted that his words were "misinterpreted to imply anything negative about those in uniform."

In a brief statement, Kerry attacked President Bush for a "failed security policy." Yet his apology, issued after prominent Democrats had urged him to cancel public appearances, was designed to quell a controversy that party leaders feared would stall their drive for big gains on Nov. 7.

With polls showing the public opposed to the war in Iraq, Democrats have expressed increasing optimism in recent days that they will gain the 15 seats they need to win control of the House. Democrats must pick up six seats to win the Senate, a taller challenge, and both parties made last-minute efforts to increase the number of competitive races.

For the Democratic senatorial committee, that meant pumping about $1 million into an Arizona race long thought out of reach. For the counterpart Republican committee, it meant a foray into Maryland, also viewed as an unlikely state to pick up a seat.

Meanwhile -

Tracking Elections
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6416611

Fresh Air from WHYY, November 1, 2006 · Election reform expert Dan Seligson is the editor of Electionline.org, a nonpartisan and non-advocacy organization that tracks and analyzes election reform issues. The site is a venture of the Election Reform Information Project.

http://electionline.org/

 

[BobG]

Well, Kerry apologized, and some Republicans are satsified.

Well, after House Majority Leader John Boehner's comments, some Republicans are cringing too much to stay on the attack against Kerry.

In an interview Wednesday on CNN, Boehner said, "Let's not blame what's happening in Iraq on Rumsfeld."

CNN's Wolf Blitzer replied, "But he's in charge of the military."

"The fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president," Boehner, an Ohio Republican, said.

Rumsfeld is so popular with the military's generals.

Said in the context of shifting blame to someone else, this is a little harsher comment than a blown line in a lame joke.

 

[Astronuc]

"The fact is, the generals on the ground are in charge, and he works closely with them and the president," Boehner,

Boehner needs to check his facts. I keeping hearing generals asking for troops and support and Rumsfeld ignores them. But sometimes what is said to Rumsfeld seems different than what is said elsewhere.

If Woodward's book is correct, and I have not heard much in the way of dispute, except perhaps some comments by Card concerning himself and Laura Bush, Rumsfeld has worked against the military. Casey and Abizaid seem to be disputing the positive comments by Rumsfeld and the President, and Rumsfeld seems to have withheld concerns from the President. In all fairness, Jay Garner and Colin Powell didn't inform the president of their concerns when they had the opportunity. On the other hand, it seems that Bush is so incurious that he really doesn't want to know how bad Iraq really is, otherwise he should have changed policy long ago.

After reading Woodward's "State of Denial", it seems that Rumsfeld and Cheney have been acting as co-presidents, with or without the consent of Bush, which is totally absurd, and which is among the reasons that the policy on Iraq has failed miserably.

 

[Astronuc]

In upstate New York, Representative John E. Sweeney, a Republican who had seemed to be weathering a tough challenge, was described by party strategists as in new danger after his local newspaper, the Glens Falls Post Star, withdrew its endorsement of him, citing reports of a domestic violence episode involving Mr. Sweeney and his wife.

NY Times, Nov. 4http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/05/us/politics/05elect.html

CLIFTON PARK -- U.S. Rep. John Sweeney and his wife on Wednesday acknowledged that State Police came to their home on Dec. 2, but they refuted a newspaper's reports that described the incident as domestic violence involving the couple.

"I do not need to be protected from John. At no time has John hurt me or done anything other than try to protect me," Gayle Sweeney, the congressman's wife, said in a conference call with reporters gathered at the Republican congressman's campaign office in Clifton Park.

Mrs. Sweeney said a published report stating she called 911 to report an incident of domestic violence was a "completely false allegation against my husband."

Congressman Sweeney, speaking directly to reporters about a half-hour later, also said he did not hit his wife.

. . . . The Times-Union of Albany reported Wednesday that State Police went to the Sweeneys' home in Clifton Park in December after his wife apparently called 911 to report an incident of domestic violence,

The Times-Union, citing a police report given to the newspaper, said the congressman's 36-year-old wife, Gaia, who goes by Gayle, had called police on Dec. 2 to report that her husband was "knocking her around," and told police that he had grabbed her by the throat and was pushing her around the house.

http://www.poststar.com/articles/2006/11/03/news/doc454907759f6d3217358203.txt

But in the Troy Record - http://www.troyrecord.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=17421392&BRD=1170&PAG=461&dept_id=7021&rfi=6

TROY - Three days after Rep. John Sweeney called on State Police to release the correct version of a domestic violence incident report, it remains more of an urban legend than a real document and it appears it will stay that way.

While not denying police were called to his Clifton Park home, Sweeney and his wife immediately said the report was falsified and called on State Police to release the original document to prove it. He also placed the blame on his opponent, Kirsten Gillibrand, for hiring someone to both leak the report and then for adding salacious details to make the incident seem more scandalous.

The Gillibrand hire who is suspect is Democratic Party adviser Howard Wolfson, the man Jones said he is investigating to see if he is the one who leaked the document. . . .

I would like to see both parties stop this kind of nonsense. Stick to the issues and let voters decide on the basis of merit of one's position on the issues.

And the media need to be more fair in their reporting and analysis. Too much is presented as fact when it is not. Uncertainties need to be reported, and allegations should be stated as such.

 

[wasteofo2]

Looks like I've been way too pessimistic all along.

Never would've guessed a completely democratic 110th Congress

 

[Gokul43201]

Hmmm...no one had the correct answer on the swing in the House! Tut, tut!

 

[Astronuc]

I was being conservative in my estimate.

 

[turbo]

I was being conservative in my estimate.

I got the Senate right, but was conservative about the House because House districts have been gerrymandered in many states, making them safer for incumbents. Of course, when I voted on the poll, Foleygate hadn't occurred - the Republican leadership's head-in-the sand approach when confronted with that slimeball's activities probably played a role in the solid Dem gains in the House.

 

[Astronuc]

Housewise, I might have gone with 10-20, and for the Senate 2-5.

Certainly Foley had an effect, but I really think Iraq is frustrating people, and rightly so. The administration has painted a rosy picture of success and everyone can see that it is not. I wonder of Woodward's book had an influence.

Another interesting race is in Connecticut District 02. Simmons (R) is the incumbent seems to have lost to Courtney (D) by 170 votes - Simmons (121,151) vs Courtney (121,321). I've heard Simmons and he seems pretty moderate.